We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The stability is very good."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The solution doesn't need a high level of technical training."
"One of the things that I enjoy the most is using policy extensions. It's like having host firewalls to control USB connections. I think it's a wonderful tool to restrict use when connecting to our computers. Another important tool is Home Insights. That is an add-on to the Cortex solution. I like that because we can see all the vulnerabilities in the environment and control what assets are connected to our network."
"The solution allows us to make investigations. Other XDR solutions also provide similar capabilities but for investigation, Cortex XDR is better."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"It integrates well into the environment."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"The stability of this product is very good."
"Its interface and pricing are most valuable. It is better than other vendors in terms of security."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The solution is not stable."
"The support needs improvement."
"Detections could be improved."
"Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can improve mobile integration to allow access to the console."
"Every 30 or 40 days, there's a new version and we need to go and make sure our customer's laptops are upgraded."
"Cortex XDR is trickier to configure than other Palo Alto products. This is one area where we are not so satisfied."
"In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by adding a sandbox feature to better compete with their competitors which have it."
"It tends to do 99.9% of things. The only thing I'd like is single sign-on authentication into their cloud platform so that my users can be properly authenticated against it."
"The price could be a little lower."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 37th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 7 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Good for pushing out security updates but it needs to add patch management". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Fortinet FortiClient, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.